I have a data set containing shape, size (= centroid size), a fixed factor such
species (three levels) and a fixed factor, nested within species, such
generation (two levels). After having checked that interaction terms
size*species and size*generation (species) were not significant, I would
perform a size correction (= standardization) to my data in order to test for
ontogenetic scaling and/or lateral transposition. I performed size correction
to my data as follows.
i) At the intraspecific (static) level, I performed three separated
standardization of data using the mean shape and size of each species. In all
the species, the difference expressed as total sum of squares between data in
shape space and allometry-free residuals equaled the amount of shape variance
explained by size.
ii) At interspecific (evolutionary) level, using the full data set (not split
per species) in shape space, I performed size correction using the grand mean
shape and size. In this instance also, the difference expressed as total sum of
squares between data in shape space and allometry-free residuals equaled the
amount of shape variance explained by size.
Have I correctly performed size correction of nested data?
Thanks in advance,
MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email